Media matters

Fox is at it again. Rupert Murdoch's 'fair and balanced' TV network caused outrage among New York liberals last week when it refused to run an ad produced by an openly gay Democrat standing for Manhattan borough president. Fox has refused to say why it made its decision, but every other station the campaign organisers approached, including NBC and CNN, agreed to run the ad.

The 30-second film attacks the president, beginning with a picture of his head, but zooming back to reveal a mock-up of a naked George Bush, accompanied by the words: 'He claims he's a uniter, but New Yorkers know the emperor has no clothes.'

The affront to Republican values continues when the candidate embraces his British-born boyfriend, Simon Holloway, saying: 'We tell you how we feel, we don't make apologies for what we believe, and we're not afraid of a fight. I'm Brian Ellner, and this is my partner, Simon.'

Although the Newscorp network has remained silent about the affair, a member of the Fox ad sales team reportedly told a campaign employee that they couldn't run it because it was 'disrespectful to the president'.

The New York Civil Liberties Union has called it an attack on free speech, and believes Fox may have violated federal law, which requires networks to sell airtime to all candidates.

Donna Lieberman, executive director of the NYCLU, said: 'The decision to reject this advertisement is clearly based on content. If [Fox] has accepted political advertising from any other candidate, its refusal to run Ellner's ad would be unlawful censorship.' If so, the network could be forced to broadcast the ad.

Fox representatives were unavailable for comment, but campaign spokesman David Meadvin told The Observer that the ad was the first in which a candidate appears with his gay partner and that Fox's decision 'sets a dangerous precedent'. The irony is that Fox has handed Ellner, one of eight Democrat candidates in Manhattan, more publicity than money can buy.

Talkin' 'bout their own generation

It sounds like a worthy idea that might work in theory but come unstuck in practice: ask a group of south London kids to produce a lifestyle magazine covering all the topics teenagers are passionate about, including music, fashion and films. But the result, free title LIVE, could sit comfortably alongside professionally produced style mags on newsagents' shelves.

The Brixton-based publication was set up by marketing agency Livity, which was asked by Lambeth for a direct marketing campaign warning teenagers about the dangers of drug abuse. An eight-page publication produced by social workers was, perhaps not surprisingly, not well received by its target audience.

Livity decided to ask local schoolchildren about their concerns but, says co-founder Sam Conniff: 'They looked at us blankly. We were only 23, but as far as they were concerned, we were just the white kids from the council.' Far better to hand over the resources needed to produce a magazine, and draft in journalistic mentors from newspapers and magazines including the Guardian and Dazed and Confused to help them create it.

'They do want to talk about issues like teenage pregnancy and drug abuse, but [they would] rather not be told about them,' Conniff says.

Articles in the July/September issue include one which asks starkly: 'Are you a rapist?' Another looks at proposals to educate black and white pupils separately.

Although the idea initially met with some resistance, other government agencies have since asked Livity to produce similar publications. LIVE is now a not-for-profit organisation and many of its staff have used it to scramble on to the first rung of the journalistic career ladder. LIVE's editor, 21-year-old Jordan Jarrett-Bryan, now works for London listings bible Time Out.

ITV in City's sights after last slump

Takeover speculation and ITV go together like Ant and Dec or Richard and Judy, but the constant chatter grows loudest each time the network reports another slump in audience share at its flagship channel, ITV1.

Last week, announcing first-half figures, chief executive Charles Allen confessed that the company was slipping still further, though the same could be said of most terrestrial stations.

More digital channels will be launched to shore up overall viewing figures, but the company is viewed as a prime bid target by the City, especially now that its £580 million pension fund deficit - a big stumbling block for potential buyers - is gradually being filled.

The other large hurdle is the huge price tag attached to the group, which has a market value close to £5 billion.

But the talk in the Square Mile is that one of the several private equity groups circling the company, most likely American giant KKR, has devised a plan that gets around the costs. It would pay cash for, say, 80 per cent of ITV, and allow existing shareholders to retain a 20 per cent stake in the new, privately owned company.

'That would provide them with sufficient cash to effect the change of control, and allow them to give an equity stake to investors,' said one commentator.

If investors can cash in their shares but retain a stake in an ITV that was run aggressively by new management, this might prove a tempting offer. A financial buyer would probably scrap the group's expensive in-house production arm, buy in programming from outside, and watch profits rise.

A subsequent lack of investment may not safeguard ITV's long-term survival, but in financial terms the sums stack up.

Former Carlton boss Lord Hollick now works for KKR, but is just one of several former TV executives who have aligned themselves with private equity groups; Greg Dyke, at Apax, is another.

However, the kingmaker is Anthony Bolton, fund manager at ITV's largest shareholder, Fidelity. Chances are he already knows about the plan. Only time will tell if he is willing to endorse it.